It was all smoke. He was awarded the presidency of the Harvard Law Review based upon melanin. He accomplished nothing there. His record as President stands by itself as an indictment against him. He has never before gone against an aggressive, skilled debater. He is the AZ Cardinals offensive line of debaters.
I agree. Unless Romney has a major stumble, this election is going our way. The emperor has no clothes, and all could see on Wednesday night. He likely will do better next time, but I have to assume Romney will be just as prepared and just as sharp, and it will be a reminder of his performance this week. Obama will likely land some nice punches since it will be all on the line next time.
Before then, voters will also see Romney’s stellar vp selection, and another contrast will be drawn. A superstar vs a hack has-been. Who made the better vp choice? It will further cement Romney’s leadership.
Wishful thinking on your part. His skin color may have helped him get into the school. The Law Review is a cutthroat business. I am paraphrasing an earlier point by Laura Ingraham.
He has never before gone against an aggressive, skilled debater. He is the AZ Cardinals offensive line of debaters.
Do you mean "other than Hillary Clinton & John Edwards?" The measure of a debater's skill is not whether you (an admittedly biased conservative) agree with them. It is whether they can sway public opinion. Obama may be out of practice, he may have the facts against him here, but he is still a VERY effective public speaker. And we certainly have not heard the last of him.
To play along with your football reference, you are starting to sound a bit like the New England Patriots before last year's Super Bowl.
I also think that Romney is well-aware of the pitfalls of the “townhall” debate format and probably has done simulated debates where essentially every questioner is Left-leaning; he can certainly call on a lot of younger people—including his own sons!—to do a perfect simulation of what an all-Left audience will be like.